Justified shooting? What say you?

[Eltigreblanco]

Warning shot or AD?

Sure looked like a negligent discharge to me

 

[Azone]

Watched the video, he had no reason to shoot him. I would consider that murder.

 

[cod007]

It seems most of you are getting all emotional thinking on this one. Maybe cause kids are involved. If this episode took place at the shooters home (not the ex wive’s home), and the deceased fella came to this shooters home, it doesn’t matter WHY/WHAT reason he was there for. He has (as I see it), trespassed, been told to leave, threatened the owner of property, attacked owner of property, and property owner can rightfully claim fear of life.
Castle doctrine/self defense can be legally argued (and won).
It also seems that many here are willing to overlook all the dumb things the deceased did to get to the point it did. As he had married this nitwit ex. He came to someone’s home who (legally) had no relationship to a custody arrangement. He made a scene there rather than calling for appropriate help. He foolishly spoke boldly to an armed man on HIS property. Then, to top it off, attempted to assault the armed man on HIS property AFTER being warned to leave. Someone on another thread said.... “play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”
Now, pending still many unknown and some known other circumstances, this at best in court could only result in a hung jury. (IMHO).
Many of the circumstances brought up on this episode of events have little factual bearing on the final pertinent result of home owner pulling the trigger.

 

[MallardSX2]

The shooter will likely go to jail for life for this. You dont shoot an unarmed person. If you do you better be prepared to go to jail forever.

PS: Did he fire the gun into the ground by his feet before he killed him?

 

[cod007]

The shooter will likely go to jail for life for this. You dont shoot an unarmed person. If you do you better be prepared to go to jail forever.

PS: Did he fire the gun into the ground by his feet before he killed him?

Unarmed folks get shot everyday and the shooter does not go to jail.

 

[MallardSX2]

I'm not saying they dont. I'm saying you shouldn't shoot an unarmed person unless you are willing to go to jail for life. Thats the world we live in. Its just not a good situation. If there was no video of this whole mess he would likely plead self defense and walk scott free. If the guy who got shot had punched the guy things would be different. If he hadn't tried to grab the gun things would have been different.

Truthfully, I just feel bad for the kid. The rest of them are a bunch of chicken focking rednecks.

 

[bsnedeker]

The shooter will likely go to jail for life for this. You dont shoot an unarmed person. If you do you better be prepared to go to jail forever.

PS: Did he fire the gun into the ground by his feet before he killed him?

The two people Rittenhouse killed were both unarmed. They were trying to take his gun away from him which they could then, presumably, have used on him, which is why he shot them and why he was found not guilty.

 

[MichaelO]

All good, except that you do not give up your right to self defense if you are doing something illegal.

Yes you do in Texas. Below is From the Texas state code one of the requirements for self defense.

this is the reason in most situations that a man robbing someone at gunpoint gets charged with murder and not self defense when they shoot someone trying to stop them with a weapon. Ie. you get shot and killed trying to shoot and stop an armed robber. That armed robber doesn’t get to claim self defense.


“3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.”

 

[GSPHUNTER]

All this back and forth and we know all it takes it the right jury, if it comes to that.

 

[Broomd]

The two people Rittenhouse killed were both unarmed. They were trying to take his gun away from him which they could then, presumably, have used on him, which is why he shot them and why he was found not guilty.

Different situation entirely. Rosenbaum had told KR he would F'ing kill him if he caught him alone that night. It was witnessed and corroborated. The dude with the skateboard wanted to 'cranium' KR and tried at least once.
Unarmed doesn't mean without a fiream. Jacob Blake was armed with a knife, many objects with lethal intent can be weapons.

The deceased in TX was pissed off about not having his son, this wee man with the 9mm took it all up 100*. Both are/were idiots, but as a 2nd A guy I hope this man fries. He bought a gun to a completely reasonable argument.

 

[bsnedeker]

Different situation entirely. Rosenbaum had told KR he would F'ing kill him if he caught him alone that night. It was witnessed and corroborated. The dude with the skateboard wanted to 'cranium' KR and tried at least once.
Unarmed doesn't mean without a fiream. Jacob Blake was armed with a knife, many objects with lethal intent can be weapons.

The deceased in TX was pissed off about not having his son, this wee man with the 9mm took it all up 100*. Both are/were idiots, but as a 2nd A guy I hope this man fries. He bought a gun to a completely reasonable argument.

Did I say there were similar? I was replying to another comment saying that you will go to jail for life if you shoot an unarmed person.

 

[cod007]

You’ve said it all, it’s very painful


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The world would do much better if we could use less emotion and more logic and common sense.
I know, I know. It all so painful.
Look where ‘emotion’ got them both!

 

[loadsandlattes]

I'm surprised to see this on Rokslide, I live here. I've seen the videos already and from the ones posted here it appears to be a complete debacle.

• The kids are the real victims here
• The shooter was in fact married to a judge. I believe their divorce was final the day after the incident.
• There is no cover up, it's moving along as it should and the whole town is talking about it. You can't cover this up. From local rumor of the previous marriage, the ex-wife judge probably doesn't feel like she owes the shooter any favors anyway.
• I'm still shocked at the reaction of the lady recording. It was like the shooter smoked a coyote or something. Zero reaction.

I'm trying to keep an open mind because so much is left out of the video that we have no clue about. None of us know the whole story or what happened previously or anything else, short of rumor or what the step-mom wrote. Still, I can't fathom why homeboy went inside to grab a gun then came out, fired warning shot, (?) and then backed off for a clear shot instead of just calling the police. For that matter, I don't know why the father didn't just call the police. In any event, I wish they had been called before this dude got blasted on the front porch rather than after.

 

[J300UM]

The most disturbing part of that video for me was that there were 0 “Fs” given about the dead man on the porch by anybody! No reaction at all. The argument just continued as if nothing happened and he was still standing right there.

 

[Q child]

Nah. That was murder.

 

[grappling_hook]

Yes you do in Texas. Below is From the Texas state code one of the requirements for self defense.

this is the reason in most situations that a man robbing someone at gunpoint gets charged with murder and not self defense when they shoot someone trying to stop them with a weapon. Ie. you get shot and killed trying to shoot and stop an armed robber. That armed robber doesn’t get to claim self defense.


“3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.”

No, you don't in Texas. What you quoted was a condition for presumption. Here is the earlier part of the subsection of the statute that the condition applies to:
"Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:"

The condition you quoted in 3) is relevant to whether or not the use of force in self-defense was or was not presumed to be reasonable. So if someone is engaged in criminal activity, they do not automatically have the benefit of being presumed to be reasonable. This means that in court, there is not a presumption that the use of self-defense was or was not reasonable (it may have been reasonable, or it may not have been reasonable; it's just not presumed either way).


You mention a case related to a robbery. I agree that the situation you described doesn't qualify as self-defense, but not because of subsection 3) that you quoted. It's because, as stated later in the same statute, the robber provoked the victim's use of force. A robber provoking someone with a lethal weapon while robbing them does not allow for self-defense if the robber ends up protecting themselves from harm from the victim in this case; in fact, it gives the victim a right to self-defense.

But in other instances (including in Texas), engaging in criminal activity doesn't remove self-defense rights. As an example, if someone is walking down the street minding their own business and a stranger suddenly attacks them with a knife, they have the right to use deadly force for self-defense, even if they had on a backpack full (felony quantity, let's say) of illegal drugs at the time. Due to your C) quote above, the force used by the backpacker/drug dealer will not be presumed to be reasonable, yet the use of force for self-defense would end up being demonstrated as legally justified.

Either way, though, I don't see that the shooter in the video we're discussing has a case for self-defense.

 

[sndmn11]

Then, to top it off, attempted to assault the armed man on HIS property AFTER being warned to leave.

The shooter doesn't have an autonomous zone where court orders and laws do not apply when it is convenient for him.

 

[Fatcamp]

Neither video shows the hands of the shootee. Defense will contend he reached towards his waistband.

 

[Squincher]

I think this will come down to how much leeway the shooter gets for being on his own porch. It isn't like he went to his car and retrieved a gun after a confrontation at a grocery store. Is any justification ever required to possess a gun on your own front porch? Is there ever a time when possessing a gun on your own front porch would be prohibited? Does someone bringing a problem to your door restrict what you are allowed to do? I've never seen or heard of a child custody order that authorized trespass on private property.

In addition to that, the shootee appeared to grab the gun before the first shot and definitely grabbed it right before he was shot. How many times was the shooter supposed to let him try to get the gun?

If this was clear cut, either way, the case would have been to the Grand Jury already. I don't envy those trying to hash this out.

 

[TheTone]

I think this will come down to how much leeway the shooter gets for being on his own porch. It isn't like he went to his car and retrieved a gun after a confrontation at a grocery store. Is any justification ever required to possess a gun on your own front porch? Is there ever a time when possessing a gun on your own front porch would be prohibited? Does someone bringing a problem to your door restrict what you are allowed to do? I've never seen or heard of a child custody order that authorized trespass on private property.

In addition to that, the shootee appeared to grab the gun before the first shot and definitely grabbed it right before he was shot. How many times was the shooter supposed to let him try to get the gun?

If this was clear cut, either way, the case would have been to the Grand Jury already. I don't envy those trying to hash this out.

Fair to argue he was trying to grab the gun to not get shot by a guy trying to murder him?